As the Earth Alliance plunges toward civil war, internal strife threatens to
shatter the command structure of B5. Zack's loyalties are put to the test
when the Nightwatch is ordered to take over station security. Londo receives
another glimpse of his destiny.
Majel Barrett as Lady Morella.
Marshall Teague as Ta'Lon.

After the death of a Centauri emperor, custom states that his spirit
lives on in the body of his consort, who speaks both for herself and
her late husband.

Londo is destined to become emperor. That part of his future cannot
be avoided, according to Lady Morella. Vir is also destined to
become emperor. One will become emperor after the other dies, but
it's not clear which.

Londo has already passed up two chances to avoid the destiny he fears
awaits him. There will be three more. He must save the eye that does
not see. He must not kill the one who is already dead. And failing
those, at the last, he must surrender himself to his greatest fear,
knowing that it will destroy him.

One result of G'Kar's Kosh-inspired revelation in
"Dust to Dust"
is the belief that humans are the key to the salvation of the Narn
race. He also believes, as Kosh suggested, that the Narn must give
up their pride and their vengeance or risk being completely destroyed,
and that his people must sacrifice themselves by the hundreds or
even the millions if all are to benefit in the end.

One of Londo's two squandered chances was undoubtedly his action in
"The Coming of Shadows,"
which sparked the Narn-Centauri War. The other is less clear.
Perhaps it was his initial meeting with Morden, or the attack on the
outpost in
"Chrysalis."
It may also have been his decision to ask the Shadows to defend Gorash 7
("The Long, Twilight Struggle,")
without which the Centauri wouldn't have been able to crush the Narn
as thoroughly as they did.

"The eye that does not see" might refer to the Eye, the
symbol of Centauri nobility that marked the start of Londo's association
with Morden
("Signs and Portents.")
It may also refer to G'Kar's eye, which appears to be injured or missing
in Londo's dream
("The Coming of Shadows.")

The one who is already dead might be Morden, who's officially dead
according to Earth Alliance records
("In the Shadow of Z'ha'dum")
or perhaps G'Kar,
whose old life is certainly gone. It's also possible that it refers
to the memory of someone who is to die; Londo may be presented with
an opportunity to discredit someone who would otherwise serve as a
martyr. Along similar lines, it may refer to the wishes of someone
already dead; for instance, destroying the chance for peace that
Emperor Turhan sought before his death, something that would have
been the Emperor's legacy.

Another possibility is a connection to the transfer of
Minbari souls to humans; the owner of a particular previously-deceased
Minbari soul (perhaps Sinclair) may prove troublesome to Londo in the
future.

Londo's greatest fear might be the downfall of the Republic,
or perhaps his own death.

It's likely Londo will squander at least the first two of his remaining
chances, given the fact that there will be a third -- assuming Morella
is correct.

What did Sheridan and the others say to convince Zack to go along with
their ruse? It may have been as simple as convincing him that the
order from the Political Office was illegal, just like Sheridan told
the trapped Nightwatch members. Using that to convince him would
have been the safest course of action, since as a loyal officer
he'd be inclined to go along with the plan even if his sympathies had
shifted toward Nightwatch.

What were all the non-security Nightwatch members doing during the
crisis? Were they unaffected by the takeover order in the first place,
and thus largely unconcerned with what was going on?

Posted to the CompuServe Star Trek forum
Before you hit the *kill* button...a thought or two in your general
direction. First, if you're eager for the actual news part of this message
-- and it is kinda important -- it appears at the end of this message. If
you've got a second, stick around.

In every interview he's given on the subject, Walter Koenig has spoken
glowingly of BABYLON 5, as a show he feels is fighting for genuine quality
SF in television, with serious, mature stories for fans who grew up on STAR
TREK and are looking for more of that quality...none other than Majel
Barrett Roddenberry has gone on record at conventions, including Toronto
Trek and the recent Wolf 359 convention, as saying that BABYLON 5 was "the
only other intelligent science fiction series out there" besides the ST
shows, and urged ST fans to support it.

If you've tried the show, and it wasn't to your tastes...fair enough.
No one should be expected to like everything. If you'd like to give it
another shot, that's fine, but there is no need to defend your opinion; we
respect it. Not every show works for every viewer.

If you *haven't* tried the show...if you liked the original ST and the
work of Majel and Walter and Harlan and others involved in it...if you like
the work of Peter David, who has written for B5 and supports it...you may
want to give it a shot in October/November.

The final four episodes from year two will be broadcast starting the
week of October 11th, with the new year three episodes beginning the second
week of November. These nine episodes in a row contain some of the best
work we have ever done. Acting, writing, directing, effects...we stand
behind all of them. (The year two Final Four were held back from earlier
broadcast to lead into the debut, so these are new to the US, although they
have already aired to substantial praise in the UK.)

If perhaps you have been turned off by some of the more vigorous
messages from B5 viewers, I'd only ask that you consider those comments in
light of the fact that Paramount (NOT the people doing ST, but the studio
itself) has done everything possible to hinder the progress of B5, which
engenders certain reactions from everyone; and that to a man or woman,
virtually all of the more vigorous posts have come from those who have long
considered themselves fans of STAR TREK, voicing many of the concerns which
are stated right here in this forum by current viewers...which they had long
before there was a B5... as well as some of the praises found here.

The ironic thing is that there is no problem between those who make B5,
and those who make ST..Jeri Taylor is a friend, Majel supports the show,
when ST does an episode with great EFX we call them, when we do a good one
they call us...it's almost entirely a matter of perception.

So for what it's worth, direct from those of us who make BABYLON 5, if
you haven't checked out the show before, or if you're curious to see where
we stand now...I would like to personally invite you to check out the new
batch of episodes starting around October 11th. If you want to give us all
nine episodes, that's great; if less, that's fine too. If not at all,
that's also fine.

Over a late dinner with Majel, I observed that after the original STAR
TREK, which for the first time presented truly *human* characters, with all
their flaws and frailties and bravery and nobility, in a science fiction
series, the ball was dropped, and no one picked it up again for years. She
agreed with this...and it is my hope that you will find this coming season
of BABYLON 5 to be that show.

Because it isn't an either/or, sum/zero game...one can watch, and
enjoy, BABYLON 5 and STAR TREK equally, for different reasons, since their
approaches are very different. And this is the perfect time to come into
B5, since these episodes encapsulize a lot of background, and will take you
quickly into the background, the universe and the characters.

Which is why, I'm pleased to announce, Majel Barrett will be appearing
as a guest star on BABYLON 5 this coming season...a gesture of support from
her, and a gesture of respect from all of us at B5. The deal has been
signed, it's a done deal...she'll be appearing in episode #9, "Point of No
Return," as Emperor Turhan's third wife, Lady Morella. We're very much
looking forward to her appearance in the B5 universe.

For all these and other reasons, I hope you'll give BABYLON 5 a try.

She'll be playing a Centauri female, the Lady Morella, Emperor Turhan's
third wife; also a prophetess and seer.

When we first announced casting Walter Koenig on B5, lots of people
moaned, "Oh, no, not Chekov on B5." What you got was Bester, who has
become one of our most noted and discussed characters. It's unfortunate,
but some people confuse the role with the person. "...the worst character
ever in the entire ST universe" has nothing to do with the person, or the
role she will be portraying: the Lady Morella, Emperor Turhan's third
wife, a prophetess and seer. It's a *very* serious, significant role,
absolutely unlike anything she's done before.

This, btw, is called "typecasting," which is one of the primary
reasons why so many talented actors who helped to create Star Trek and
other series couldn't get work for so many years...they did so good a
job that they forever *became* that character. Let's not be guilty of
that crime here. Majel's character will no more be Troi than Bester is
Chekov.

Ellen: thanks. As for the episode in question, it's entitled "Point of
No Return," and the role of Lady Morella was written specifically for Majel.
I hustled to get it finished prior to the Wolf 359 convention, where I gave
her a copy of the script. She read it overnight, and fell in love with the
story, the character, and what it was going to do with and to the BABYLON 5
universe (to wit: start turning it upside down). Next morning, she said
"I'm in." And she is.

Yes, it's a jms script, and is one of the most pivotal of this season,
episode #9, which with the one before it, "Messages from Earth," builds to a
major turning point in #10, so it should be a very popular, intense and
memorable episode in every respect.

I'd just like to say that Majel did a great job for us
on B5, and we are hoping we can come up with other opportunities
for the character to return. I know that Majel is
interested in pursuing other acting gigs outside ST, and I
wish her all the best. I think other shows would do well to
utilize her abilities; everyone had a great time working with
her, and she should be recognized for work other than ST.

Was Morella's speech about greatness intended as a tribute to
Gene Roddenberry?
There's probably a fair amount there that could apply to Gene, yes...

If a word comes out of a character's mouth, it's usually mine.
The bit about greatness was one of them; had a number of different
subtexts going on behind it.

Of course, there are many who don't see such people in a Good
Light; even Washington had people out smearing his name every day
(which, among more altruistic reasons, was why he didn't want to stay
in charge forever). We are never so greatly appreciated as when we're
safely and conveniently deceased.

Btw, on the topic of titles...it's important for the season title to
accurately reflect the events of the season. And as I've watched more and
more of season 3 being filmed, it becomes increasingly clear that "I am become
Death, the destroyer of worlds" isn't as apt, emotionally, for what's going
on. (I've actually felt this for a while, which is why I've been hesitating
on locking down the title publicly.) The single most emblematic title, and
single episode, for the whole season, really, is "Point of No Return," because
on every level, that's what happens this season.

Thanks...it ratchets things up a bit more, certainly. The big
stuff's just around the corner.

Most of the Omega class of destroyers are given Greek names,
such as Achilles, Alexander, Agamemnon and others.

Correct, the Alexander would've come off the assembly line a
bit after the Aggy.

We could've easily played the EFX full-screen, as WB used them in the promos,
after all. But it's a slow tease, a reveal. You do it big in Messages, hold
it back just a bit, at arm's length, in PoNR, then bring it all REAL close
again in the next episode. By putting it at some remove in PoNR, it makes
the viewer almost like one of those in the Zocalo, fighting for a better
look, stranded out far away, trying to figure out what's going on.

Did someone call out "Furillo, Francis" during the roll
call of security guards? Furillo was a "Hill Street Blues" character.
No, actually, the name was Pirello, Francis...hadn't realized it was a
sound-alike for Furillo until dailies came in.

I think Zack was mainly nervous in that last bit,
which may account for his twitchiness. And yes, Morella often
prophesied for Turhan.

About Morella's prophecy
There's another way to look at this, which occured to me as I was writing
it, so I structured it accordingly.

Morella: "You must save the eye that does not see."

Londo: "I...do not understand."

I.

Eye.

We never actually saw how she spelled or meant this.

Given Londo's background, one could almost make the case that the
discussion was about him. Not saying that's it, but it's a possibility
and a subtext.

Which side is Dr. Franklin's father on?
Stephen's father is a by-the-book guy; he doesn't think his job
is to set policy, only to implement policy.

Aren't those Nightwatch posters a bit too much? Wouldn't people
object?
It's not always as simple as that. You also take a uniquely
Western perspective. Look around at Russia, Cuba, 1930s Germany and
the beer hall putsch, Iraq, Iran...a leader can survive all kinds of
opposition if he has sufficient control of the armed forces. After the
Gulf War, it was generally assumed that Saddam would be gone within a
few months; now his position is stronger than ever.

Also, Clark didn't (ostensibly) declare martial law to protect
himself, he did it because of an imminent alien threat which was
detected long before these allegations came out, we just had Ganymede
attacked and that's spitting distance from the primary Earth jump gate
at Io...there is indication of collaboration and conspiracy among some
in the Joint Chiefs (and in fact that's correct, from his point of
view, given Hague's activities)...there's enough ammo there to justify
martial law. Dissolve the Senate? Just happened a couple years ago in
Russia, when we had tanks firing on the Senate building. Some might say
that Yeltsin was in the same position as Clark in that his motives
might be saving himself.

(The majority of our posters, btw, are taken from genuine WW II
propaganda and war-support posters that were actually in use. We make
some slight modifications, but the gist is there. Yes, we do fall for
these things, we do go for these things. We always have.)

As for the USA-western perspective...during WW II we saw
Japanese civilians interned in camps along the West Coast...afterward
we saw people prosecuted for being Reds, saw careers and lives
destroyed by even the hint of "commie" influence. If you look at
newsreels and documentary footage from the time, you see a populace,
fresh out of a war, who survived by focusing on the Enemy, given a new
enemy. Might they have gone along with some kind fo martial law if
they thought that if they *didn't* cooperate, the nation might be
vulnerable to Russian nukes or invasion? I think the climate was
perfect for it.

Could it happen right here, right now? No, because the
surrounding climate isn't right. Could it happen if the conditions
*were* right? Of course it could. We're not genetically or
evolutionarily different from the Germans or the Russians or the Cubans
or the Iraquis. If we think we'd never fall for that, we place
ourselves in *exactly* the position of guaranteeing that we *will* fall
for it. Because we won't recognize it when it happens. We can justify
and rationalize it as something else.

Yeah, people back on Earth still have guns. What of it? Right
now, with martial law, the streets are quiet, the news is more positive
than usual for a change, the quarrelsome jerks in the senate have been
given a good kick in the butt, the president's getting things *done*,
we've all still got our jobs, the muggers are hiding out, life goes on
except for the lawbreakers. You gonna go out on your own and start
shooting at Earthforce troops armed to the teeth with *vastly* more
advanced weaponry? On whose behalf? The aliens? The troublemakers?
What're we rallying for? Or against? This'll blow over soon, it
always does. It never lasts. Right now, just ride it out, wait and
see what happens. Who knows...maybe Clark's right? Who wants to be
perceived as a traitor?

Those are the thoughts of any populace in this situation. Just
as when Yeltsin declared martial law in Moscow, as when Mayor Daly sent
in the shock troops in Chicago, on and on.

Here's the number one rule: a population will always stay
passive for as long as they perceive that they stand to lose more by
opposing the government than by staying quiet. It's when they have
little or nothing left to lose that they rise up; the politicos first,
then, more reluctantly, the general population.

Here's something to consider in this.

It's easy -- safe and reassuring -- to dismiss Nightwatch and the whole
political climate on Earth at this time as referring to Nazi germany...SS,
Stormtroopers, informers...but if we know our history, it shows that this is
not so isolated as we might think. If we say it was just the Nazis, then
it's a non-repeatable phenomenon, we needn't worry about it again.

But, of course, it does happen again...it did, and it will, to varying
degrees. Go back to the Inquisition, and forward to Joe McCarthy and the
House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) which destroyed lives and
reputations based on association, past history, social contacts and party
affiliations (the items specified by Musante to the EA folks in Nightwatch).
Stalin and to a lesser extent Lenin would have been right at home in
Nightwatch. Several of the leaders speaking for parties in the ruins of what
was once Yugoslavia would also fit.

It's easy, and safe, for us to say, "Oh, we would never do that, only THEY
did that." But the "they" in this ARE the we on the other side...and "we"
have done it, are doing it now, and will continue to do it. Only when we
*know* the history of such things, when we recognize the rhetoric of control,
when we oppose blacklisting and scapegoating and dead-catting do we help to
assure that they *won't* arise again. Remember the quote: "Those who do not
remember history are condemned to repeat it."

There's a great deal of generalized historical and political metaphor in the
show, never one-to-one because that's too easy, but disguised in one form or
another, transumted. The Centauri Republic isn't a real republic by any
stretch of the imagination...any more than the Roman Republic from which it
draws some of its political structure, particularly the Centarum, the ruling
body. There's a great deal of Japanese political and social structure to the
Minbari, in their culture and art and some of their philosophy. You can find
parallels to the story in World War II, and the bible, among a few dozen
others.

Too little of TV these days is *about* anything...it's all context, no
subtext. This show is about a lot of things...but never in the mode of
telling you what to think. We'll ask *that* you think, that you consider the
world around you, and your place in it...but defining that is your business,
not ours.

"I don't believe a conservative nightwatch would be tolerated
either."

Senator Joseph McCarthy. The House Un-American Activities
Committee. You can look it up.

Also, there was a PBS documentary this past week on the
blacklist; I suggest that ANYone who thinks we would never fall for
something like the Nightwatch should take a look at it. It makes the
Nightwatch look pale by comparison.

The House Un-American Activities Committee wasn't that powerful.
I disagree. When even Truman was loathe to take on HUAC and
McCarthy, you've got a real problem. You make the impact sound
minimal; but people committed suicide when their careers were ruined by
HUAC and Tailgunner Joe. I personally know writers who were at the top
of their form and their careers who never worked again because they
were blacklisted or greylisted.

It was also the climate created by HUAC that threatened much
more widely than the actions of the committee itself. Take Red
Channels, a sleazy little rag published by the owner of a *SUPERMARKET
CHAIN* in which he listed those he considered -- based on whim or
divine revelation -- reds or sympathetic to reds. Even a publication
like that had tremendous destructive power. I know one of the writers
listed in Red Channels; the networks grey-listed him instantly. It was
*years* before he could work again.

The whole red-baiting hysteria of the 50s came as close to
destroying the American dream as any threatened invasion. If it had
been led by someone a little less self-destructive than McCarthy, I
hate to think what would've happened.

"Even in the USSR the military would not support an attempt of
martial law."

You mean like when Yeltsin called up the military, dissolved
the Senate, and had tanks open fire on the Senate building to keep from
being ousted in a coup...you mean like that?

Yes, right to assemble, free speech rights, they're all open to abridgement.
Travel can also be restricted.

Thanks. No, I understand the point, I'm just getting into the
details a bit. One last point I forgot to mention was that even for
the US, there has never yet been a situation where we as an entire
*species* stood on the brink of extinction by an alien race. That'll
definitely affect your mindset a bit....

"Zack is the key figure here. He's the one questioning if he's on the right
side and just what his allies are up to. I've heard some good analogies to
present days situations kicked around on these boards, but It seems mostly
Republicans want to accuse democrats and vice versa. What we need is more
Republicans willing to criticise fellow republicans and democrats willing to
criticise fellow democrats."

A very good point. Zack is, to all intents and purposes, the Everyman
character in this; he wants, desperately, to do what's right. But he doesn't
exactly *know* what's right, because he's getting conflicting
information...or rather, a lack of *real* information and a plethora of
agendas. Who is he to believe? Which way does he jump when he's not sure
which pit holds the lion?

When a culture become factionalized, when it becomes us vs. them, everyone
starts setting up consistently smaller camps...first it's democrats vs.
republicans...then it's mainstream republicans vs. conservative
republicans...then it's conservative republicans vs. religious right
republicans (with the democrats having equal problems on their side). As
soon as we forget that we're *all* US, it begins to fall apart.

Corwin's question is really one that hits a lot; you see things
starting to fly apart, but you keep thinking it's gonna work out..then it all
goes to hell, and you're standing there trying to figure out how it all
slipped away. It's a very innocent, yet universal question.

"...I wanted Sheridan &Co. to cut themselves free of Earthgov,
and they didn't."

'Course, if you were to do anything that monumental, you'd
spike right smack in the middle of your three-part story.

One of the things about these three episodes that's again worth
stressing is that they're really one story, linked carefully. Each of
the three begins *one frame* after the other. After they've aired, if
you sit down with a VCR and edit them together, you'll find that they
flow absolutely SEAMLESSLY from one to the other. So PoNR is at the
dead center of the piece that propels you toward the last third, like
the second act in a three-act play (which was my structure for this).

That may help.

We knew that at some juncture they'd be split, so numbering
them as parts 1, 2 and 3 would be awkward. And distribution hates
having to market multi-parters, for reasons of their own. So...three
episodes.

Glad you enjoyed "Point." It sets everything up, so we can
knock it all down in "Severed Dreams." Now everyhing I need is right
where I need it to be....

Certainly G'Kar has had...a revelation, I suppose is the best way of putting
it, and that tends to transform you. What form emerges from this remains to
be seen.

Ta'Lon's line about answers and replies
No, I don't think that's a quote from anywhere but the show, at
least insofar as I know.

Was bringing Ta'Lon back something you wanted to do from the
start?
I liked Ta'Lon, and definitely wanted to bring him back.

We've already established in the episode that the bodyguard is the same as in
"All Alone." We did that when the two had a drink in the zocalo. It was in
dialogue.

I liked Londo's line about politics.
Thanks, and I agree with those scenes. (For me, the Vir/Londo
scene in the tag is just hysterical.) Re: "politics has nothing to do
with intelligence," yeah, I kinda liked that one. I have fun....

Centauri are always suspicious, and if you knew you might be
emperor after the other is dead, you might be encourage to...help that
process along, however you might like someone. It's just good
business.

When we come back, the very next episode has a very funny scene
re: Londo and Narn security. And yes, that was the Schwartzkopf.

Is the fact that Hague was on the Alexander a reference to Alexander
Haig?
Y'know, I think this was one of those subconscious things the
brain does sometimes...I hadn't put it together when I put him on that
ship. It's a sad thing when you can't even trust your own brain
anymore.

"Ok, at the end of this ep. Susan explains that 4 of the 5 cruisers with
Gen. Hague where distroyed. So did Earthforce get them or did Clark have the
shadows do it?"

It was an ambush by Earthforce ships. (Actually, only 3 were destroyed,
the other two took off separately, trying to throw off a united pursuit.
But you know how ISN's been lately....)

Delenn was taking care of some business on Minbar.

There's not a lower house in the EA, in the sense that each
nation/state has its own various houses, and its own leader, but that
leader is also part of the EA senate. One per nation/state. Each
nation/state has its own constitution, but must not contravene the
larger principles of the EA constitution.